Posted on 04/20/2016 2:16:09 PM PDT by markomalley
Donald Trump professed his love for waterboarding during a campaign rally in Indianapolis, Indiana on Wednesday calling it “great.”
While discussing ISIS, Trump said, “Now we’re living in medieval times. We’re weak, we’re ineffective.”
After slamming Ted Cruz for his “weak, pathetic answer” at a debate regarding waterboarding, Trump said, “They asked me, What do you think about waterboarding, Mr. Trump?’ I said I love it. I love it, I think it’s great. And I said the only thing is, we should make it much tougher than waterboarding, and if you don’t think it works folks, you’re wrong. But you know, there are laws, we have laws that we have to abide by.”
“So I say we’re going to have to strengthen the laws and toughen up the laws, and we’re going to have to make ourselves tougher because they can chop off heads, they can drown people in steel cages,” Trump argued.
ISIS “can put people in steel cages by 25 and 50 people and drop them in the water and pull them up an hour later and we can’t waterboard,” Trump fumed. “How stupid are we? How stupid are we?”
> I have read that waterboarding was first used to train some of our own elite military before it was every used on terrorists.
You read right.
I held out for 75 seconds, but that was in the mid-60s.
And a few years later, they stopped it as part of the training.
Are you for real? You cannot be that out of it,are you a Clinton supporter?
Actually, it was first used by the Spanish Inquisition.
I did not know that.
What is your perspective on its use in interrogating terrorists?
I’m sure nobody expected that.
Of course not...NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition!!
Waterboarding has long been considered a war crime by the United States.
Here I lift just one example from Wikipedia:
“In 1947, during the Yokohama War Crimes Trials, the United States prosecuted a Japanese civilian who had served in World War II as an interpreter for the Japanese military, Yukio Asano, for “Violation of the Laws and Customs of War”, asserting that he “did unlawfully take and convert to his own use Red Cross packages and supplies intended for” prisoners, but, far worse, that he also “did willfully and unlawfully mistreat and torture” prisoners of war. The charges against Asano included “beating using hands, fists, club; kicking; water torture; burning using cigarettes; strapping on a stretcher head downward.”[223] The specifications in the charges with regard to “water torture” consisted of “pouring water up [the] nostrils” of one prisoner, “forcing water into [the] mouths and noses” of two other prisoners, and “forcing water into [the] nose” of a fourth prisoner.[224] Asano received a sentence of 15 years of hard labor.”
If you want to support Trump, fine. Like others, you should just pretend you don't take Trump seriously when he advocates for war crimes.
I’m fine with waterboarding.
“Are you for real? You cannot be that out of it,are you a Clinton supporter?”
In order: yes and no.
Nice try, but this is not the case. It is a violation of the protections of lawful combatants who are captured--and nobody is advocating waterboarding lawful combatants.
People blending into to a population out of uniform for the mass murder of civilians do not fall under the protections of lawful prisoners of war.
If there are any other arguments that may actually be valid, I still welcome hearing of them.
If you want to advocate war crimes, I can't stop you. Just be aware that your cheerful justification of the practice is setting up captured American soldiers for the same treatment.
And you break ranks with America's greatest generation.
From Wikipedia”
“In 1947, during the Yokohama War Crimes Trials, the United States prosecuted a Japanese civilian who had served in World War II as an interpreter for the Japanese military, Yukio Asano, for “Violation of the Laws and Customs of War”, asserting that he “did unlawfully take and convert to his own use Red Cross packages and supplies intended for” prisoners, but, far worse, that he also “did willfully and unlawfully mistreat and torture” prisoners of war. The charges against Asano included “beating using hands, fists, club; kicking; water torture; burning using cigarettes; strapping on a stretcher head downward.”[223] The specifications in the charges with regard to “water torture” consisted of “pouring water up [the] nostrils” of one prisoner, “forcing water into [the] mouths and noses” of two other prisoners, and “forcing water into [the] nose” of a fourth prisoner.[224] Asano received a sentence of 15 years of hard labor.”
You’re clueless.
Like Senator Cruz, I don’t love it. But like Ted, I think it’s sometimes necessary. In fact, I’m willing to do a lot more to these terrorists. It’s about protecting our country and saving lives.
I don't think captured American soldiers have to worry about being watereboarded; they're far more likely to be burned alive, crucified or beheaded.
This was hashed out long ago. Again, from Wikipedia:
“The term unlawful combatant has been used for the past century in legal literature, military manuals and case law.[3] The term “unlawful combatants” was first used in U.S. municipal law in a 1942 United States Supreme Court decision in the case Ex parte Quirin.[28] In this case, the Supreme Court upheld the jurisdiction of a U.S. military tribunal over the trial of eight German saboteurs in the U.S. during World War II. This decision states:
By universal agreement and practice, the law of war draws a distinction between the armed forces and the peaceful populations of belligerent nations and also between those who are lawful and unlawful combatants. Lawful combatants are subject to capture and detention as prisoners of war by opposing military forces. Unlawful combatants are likewise subject to capture and detention, but in addition they are subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals for acts which render their belligerency unlawful. The spy who secretly and without uniform passes the military lines of a belligerent in time of war, seeking to gather military information and communicate it to the enemy, or an enemy combatant who without uniform comes secretly through the lines for the purpose of waging war by destruction of life or property, are familiar examples of belligerents who are generally deemed not to be entitled to the status of prisoners of war, but to be offenders against the law of war subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals.”
Note well the sentence: “Unlawful combatants are likewise subject to capture and detention, but in addition they are subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals for acts which render their belligerency unlawful.”
Other than a Bush-era executive order, I don't know of any justification for torture of an enemy by U.S. forces.
Under the circumstances, Bush can be pardoned, or maybe just censured, for his administration's limited use of waterboarding.
The real problem is the slippery slope. Just 15 years after 9/11 voters are considering giving torture powers to either a radical Marxist like Clinton, or an idiot like Trump.
“You’re clueless.”
You ignore my argument but you don’t refute it.
Good plan on your part.
When war crimes are committed against American soldiers I call it war crimes.
What do you call it?
I've read the entirety of The Knights of Bushido; I don't recall any references to waterboarding.
I would set the terrorists and their supporters on fire then ask them questions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.